Sign in with Facebook
Loading...
71st out of 83 books
—
1 voter
The Case for Animal Rights: Updated with a New Preface
by
Tom Regan
More than twenty years after its original publication, The Case for Animal Rights is an acknowledged classic of moral philosophy, and its author is recognized as the intellectual leader of the animal rights movement. In a new and fully considered preface, Regan responds to his critics and defends the book's revolutionary position.
Paperback, 474 pages
Published
September 17th 2004
by University of California Press
(first published October 1st 1983)
Friend Reviews
To see what your friends thought of this book,
please sign up.
Community Reviews
(showing
1-30
of
528)
I know this book is supposed to be a classic, but I found it rather a chore to deal with. It's a big book, and it has a number of good features, but since everyone seems to be talking about those I will just list a couple of complaints.
My main dislike was the pondering way in which it handled certain topics, such as animal's mental life, which managed somehow to cover the terrain exhaustively while simultaneously misreading and therefore failing to engage with the alternative views we spend so...more
My main dislike was the pondering way in which it handled certain topics, such as animal's mental life, which managed somehow to cover the terrain exhaustively while simultaneously misreading and therefore failing to engage with the alternative views we spend so...more
May 31, 2008
Tad
rated it
5 of 5 stars
·
review of another edition
Recommends it for:
moral philosophers, animal rights activists, animal lovers, vegans and vegetarians
this book presents the most comprehensive and complete argument for the concept of animal rights to date. it is a large book (nearly 500 pages) which encompasses many topics in philosophy and applied ethics. the first quarter of the book is dedicated to establishing the mental lives of animals and refuting traditional and contemporary arguments against this hypothesis. he offers easy to follow common sense arguments mixed with arguments borrowed from evolutionary biology to help him in this task...more
There is only one rational basis for thinking about ethics, and that is the reality of suffering. Regan does not realize that it is irrelevant whether his rights-based theory is internally coherent and sounds pretty - it has no basis in empirical reality. To refute him, all one has to say is "No, that's not true." An explanation of why it is not true isn't equired - he gives no reasons for believing it is true.
Nonsense on stilts indeed! (and this is coming from a committed vegan!).
Nonsense on stilts indeed! (and this is coming from a committed vegan!).
This book is the logical and moral conclusion to The Origin of Species. It is an excellent primer to moral philosophy in general, so that it is naturally an excellent primer to fun questions like, "What is consciousness?" Even if you have no interest in animal rights issues, most philosophy schools are finding AR to be an elegant lens through which to introduce these concepts.
The Case for Animal Rights finds a place in the world for this species of ours full of humility, dignity, and honor. Were...more
The Case for Animal Rights finds a place in the world for this species of ours full of humility, dignity, and honor. Were...more
Couldn't make it through this book. To be specific, couldn't even finish the updated introduction. Skimmed the rest. Don't agree with any of the concepts in the book.
The deontological yin to Singer's utilitarian yang. I'm much more in the latter camp, so I'm unconvinced by his argument concerning inherent worth and subjects-of-a-life. Then again, I don't think it's useful to talk about inherent or intrinsic value even for humans, so I'm probably in the minority. I'm all for human rights, mind you, but I approach them primarily from a rule utilitarian perspective.
Regan makes a solid case for the moral consideration of animals, though I find the discourse of 'rights' unnecessary. The book is long but thorough, covering many issues to do with ethics, moral principles and our treatment of animals, as well as engaging with some counter-arguments. Not always easy going, but a central text in the field.
Incredibly well-argued. Don't think anyone could read this and continue to eat meat.
Testa lite
I guess I have read enough AR literature for a lifetime, or at least for the time being.
Though I'm well used to reading theoretical philosophic literature, I couldn't manage to finish this one. I assume this is a very good book and I appreciate the critic of Peter Singer, but it takes far too long to finally arrive at the main topic, which is animal rights.
Though I'm well used to reading theoretical philosophic literature, I couldn't manage to finish this one. I assume this is a very good book and I appreciate the critic of Peter Singer, but it takes far too long to finally arrive at the main topic, which is animal rights.
A comprehensively worked out theory of animal rights. Contrasts with Peter Singer's utilitiarian approach by defending the notion that animals have inherent rights to be accorded respect. The underlying moral theory is, ultimately, not completely persuasive (what moral theory is?), but it's an exhaustive look at the issues, and written clearly enough that a determined non-specialist could benefit from it.
The book teetered too awkwardly on the fence between being an introductory work, and being serious and academic.
I wanted to give this book five stars, but it is pretty heavy reading although the author tried to make it non-philosopher friendly. Still it's a great book and definitely worth reading (although it may take you a little while! :))
179.3
May 12, 2007
Lisa Vegan
rated it
5 of 5 stars
Recommends it for:
people who care about animals, those interested in philosphy
Cogent and convincing (to me) arguments for the rights of animals and humans from a philosophy professor who believes in animal rights. I read an earlier edition after I heard him speak at a conference.
sound Kantian arguments, coupled to a rich description of the higher mammals as "subjects to life". Very well-organized and lucid; perfect for undergraduate ethics debates
Una alternativa al utilitarismo que por fin toma en cuenta a los animales, pero hay partes del libro que pueden resultar muy complicadas para el lector casual.
This book is deep, had to spend a lot of time re-reading portions. Helped me confirm my decision to not eat meat
Jun 16, 2013
Gwen Van sande
marked it as to-read
Jun 15, 2013
Hailie Marinovich
marked it as to-read
Jun 14, 2013
Cheryl
marked it as to-read
Jun 11, 2013
Quee
marked it as to-read
Jun 10, 2013
Angela Rudd
marked it as to-read
Jun 09, 2013
Maria
marked it as to-read
Jun 07, 2013
Micaylah
marked it as to-read
Jun 03, 2013
John Stoddard
marked it as to-read
Jun 02, 2013
Jena
marked it as to-read
Jun 01, 2013
Bernie Adams
marked it as to-read
There are no discussion topics on this book yet.
Be the first to start one »
Tom Regan is an American philosopher who specializes in animal rights theory. He is professor emeritus of philosophy at North Carolina State University, where he taught from 1967 until his retirement in 2001.
Regan is the author of numerous books on the philosophy of animal rights, including The Case for Animal Rights (1983), one of a handful of studies that have significantly influenced the modern...more
More about Tom Regan...
Regan is the author of numerous books on the philosophy of animal rights, including The Case for Animal Rights (1983), one of a handful of studies that have significantly influenced the modern...more
Share This Book
No trivia or quizzes yet. Add some now »
“To be 'for animals' is not to be 'against humanity.' To require others to treat animals justly, as their rights require, is not to ask for anything more nor less in their case than in the case of any human to whom just treatment is due. The animal rights movement is a part of, not opposed to, the human rights movement. Attempts to dismiss it as anti human are mere rhetoric.”
—
17 people liked it
More quotes…
Aug 16, 2010 03:38pm